swansont

That’s the point. “real” (as in physical) is not required to be relevant, observable (as in measurable), and scientific, despite the claim.

I imagine it means there is a distance from A to B. But that distance is relative to the frame from which it is measured. I don’t think anyone who understands physics is going to. I suppose a crackpot could show up and do so. Length is not a physical object. Neither is time. They are relevant and scientific. Yes. The issue was being inherent. A square that is measured by a moving observer will not have four sides of equal length. The shape in the rest frame is not inherent.

In that regard it’s more like running a stop sign/red light, or driving drunk. It’s not just about the individual’s risk of harming themselves.

! Moderator Note Logic helps, but what we want is for you to support your claims with evidence And? I’m failing to understand why this matters. We can’t travel back in time to unscramble an egg, either. That’s a pretty meaningless claim.

And I’m arguing the latter. It’s somewhere you would stop to replenish supplies if you were headed in that general direction. But in arguing that, “10 light years is a small region relative to the size of the galaxy” doesn’t apply, and neither does “how many technological species are there in a region of 10 light years of the Earth” No, it’s not really like that at all. Grains of sand are touching each other. It’s more like islands in the ocean and you’re on a slow sailboat. You’re going to plot courses with stops where you can pick up e.g. fresh water, unless you absolutely know you can make to your ultimate destination. We’ve identified extrasolar planets and the premise here is that the aliens are more technologically advanced than we currently are, so they would know that there are rocky planets around that average yellow star. The latter does not require the former. We’ve noticed many extrasolar planets, without determining that any of them are special. Noticing comes first. How would you determine a planet is “special” without having noticed it first? Sure, there could be unknown motivations, but we already have known motivations.

I think you are incorrect about what “we” know Why does “existing in a physical sense” matter? The shape is not inherent. The best you can do is say what the shape is in a particular frame, such as the rest frame. It’s trivial to avoid. There is no superposition, as has been explained multiple times.

Small relative to the size of the galaxy is only relevant if your craft can traverse the galaxy without replenishing Irrelevant to the issue under discussion, unless one is proposing that the aliens wouldn’t be stealthy when approaching other solar systems, and that other systems don’t have resources aliens might want. I think you are arguing from a flawed premise.

! Moderator Note If anyone thinks rules have been broken they can and should use the report post function to bring it to the attention of the mods. Please leave enforcement up to the staff. Unless someone is asserting some sort of authority based on claimed credentials, I don’t see how profile claims are relevant to any discussion. In any event, we don’t require verification of them. If someone posts something that’s incorrect, feel free to correct it.

Unfortunately a fair number of people complaining about rights are invoking phantom rights, with the misconception that “freedom” means “doing whatever I want” Countries (generally speaking) have constitutions, which serve to describe the powers granted to the government. It may be that some powers may only be exercised under certain conditions, such as during a pandemic. If such power is granted, and exercised, individual rights are not being violated - they don’t actually exist.

! Moderator Note From rule 2.7 Attached documents should be for support material only; material for discussion must be posted. Documents must also be accompanied by a summary, at minimum. Please post enough material to support discussion

Since time come into play in phenomena that do not involve human psychology, though, how can that be?

I don't see this as emergent. Pressure is related to a force, and the individual collisions also relate to a force, via conservation of momentum. It's a matter of scale and collective behavior. But I don't see how you can say that the force is not present in the parts. IOW, it's collective behavior, but this is not emergent behavior.

Not only haven't we reached a sustained reaction, from that other thread it's clear that we aren't anywhere close to that point. The video has precious little scientific detail in it that indicates we're making much progress.

! Moderator Note How about we discuss the topic of the thread and not extraneous detail of what's in someone's profile

"Common" is similar to the "throughout" I objected to earlier. How many rocky planets with liquid water are within, say, 10 light-years of earth? That's the thing; there aren't billions of choices if you are traveling along some path. And there's nothing about this premise where earth was "singled out" so that's moot.

That's a different kettle of fish. This isn't about seeking us out, specifically Earth certainly could be noticed as a low-ish gravity rocky planet from afar, irrespective of detecting signs of intelligent life. So if you're looking for raw materials, it's a candidate that you can land on, isn't very cold, and one that isn't overly costly in terms of energy required to go gather those raw materials. So if you're plotting a path through interstellar space, we'd likely be on a map of potential refueling stops.

! Moderator Note This isn't the proper place to post it; we're a discussion board, not a publisher. If you have things you wish to discuss, then post those topics. Do the blogging/soapboxing elsewhere

Sure, traveling light-years to get to the next system is “easy pickings”

“throughout” is doing some heavy lifting here. There’s a whole lot of space. “nothing” is what’s plentiful You don’t have to actually be on earth to be noticed.

Interplanetary travel is assumed here. Eventually you will need to replenish, and no, they are not found anywhere.

Not even raw materials?

Several factors possibly in play - It could be supercooled, and the bubbles are the disturbances that allow freezing. - What you say about the freezing point isn’t an argument against this - if the system is at -2C, and under pressure freezes at -3 C, and you lower the pressure so the freezing point is -1 C, the liquid is suddenly below the freezing point. So it freezes - CO2 coming out of solution reduces the freezing point depression, so it might now be below the freezing point, as above.

You are free to open a thread in speculations and present evidence to support this claim. Assertions are insufficient, and this is also not in keeping with relativity, so it has no place in this discussion.

Don’t change the subject. You asked about superposition and relativity, not about the block universe interpretation. If you want to ask about the block universe, open a new thread.

Just as there are different kinetic energies; it depends on who does the measuring. Length, like kinetic energy, is a relative quantity. Two measurements by two different observers does not mean anything is in two positions at once, just as it doesn’t have two speeds at once. A superposition is measured by a single observer.